174. In his initial response to my memorandum
in draft, Mr O'Sullivan argued that I had overlooked a central
plank of Mr Robinson's case, namely -

"The inherent implausibility of Mr Robert
Maxwell making a payment to Mr Robinson, just days before making
a payment of £150,000 to him from Central & Sheerwood
Plc, the interlinking of these two issues and the contrast between
their treatment i.e. one very correctly carried out in every aspect
and the other, as you allege, an illicit arrangement."

175. I do not find this argument persuasive.
I do not regard it as "implausible" that Mr Robinson
decided to treat one of the payments differently from the other.
In any case, as Mr O'Sullivan accepts, the payment from Central
& Sheerwood was agreed after that from Pergamon and
only paid some time later. And the Pergamon payment met a particular
need that Mr Robinson had at the timethat is to say, the
reduction of that part of the Roll Centre debt which could otherwise
have been regarded as a director's loan after the takeover of
Transfer Technology Ltd. by Central & Sheerwood.